Years of work on the trail paying off for Cristobal and Oregon
Comments
-
I'm not sure it was always "clowned" by Stanford, and they also beat them. But that's one team. The bottom line is that they had a run, it was a good run that didn't produce a natty, but a good run nonetheless. Washington was poised to have a run with Peterman, but he fizzled out and the run wasn't as good. He's right. You have to go back 20 years. Washington has not been Washington in a long time.haie said:
I did not say in terms of football.SFGbob said:
In terms of football? No fucking way are they equal. We left you guys behind in about 2000 and we've rarely looked back since. Yeah, I'm sure when the Billionaire Phil Knight dies he will do nothing to make sure Oregon's dominance doesn't continue.haie said:
I'm saying it like it's a complete failure on the coaching and AD, because it is.SFGbob said:
And yet despite your "superiority" the football product that you've put on the field for the last 25 years has only rarely been superior to the product Oregon has put on the field.haie said:Like I said if you look at the last 3 years of the Pac 12, it's ridiculous to claim any of those teams and coaches were great. They all shit the bed, had an easy conference championship game, and the difference was who they played in their bowl. It's certainly not a "marginal difference" saying that playing Ohio State who owns the entire conference isn't much different than that knuckle dragging Wisconsin team that put the ball on the ground for you. You play who you play so I don't have a problem with their rose bowl champ stuff, but it's a little early to crown his ass anything as anything more than 2016 Pete.
I'm not really talking about graduation rates. I'm talking about the fact that Oregon isn't telling kids "this is going to be so hard, you're going to get pushed to your limit, and we don't want anyone that isn't willing to do that". They're selling fun and correctly making college football on the west coast attractive to both recruits and fans. I've never seen UW do that in the last 6 years except how awesome their grades will be and how well they develop for the league. The rest of it isn't hard to shirk off if you're a sought after recruit. Sure athletes still have an easier time than most at UW. But they don't find that out until they get there.
Moreover what I see from the marketing department regarding how great Seattle is, Amazon and Microsoft, etc, isn't something I think kids care that much about. Their parents probably don't either.
But yes, UW is *fucking* superior to Oregon, and always will be. There are some people that would excel at all 4 schools, but who gives a shit.
But hey, at least you have the comfort in knowing that UW isn't selling fun to their recruits or fans. Got to find those little "victories" wherever you can I guess.
If you think that UW and Oregon are somehow equal and don't have different challenges to deal with, as in UW is in Seattle and wants to be just like Cal/Stanford/UCLA and a lot of people there don't give a fuck about sports at all, you're a moron. You should appreciate that until the inevitable Phil death and the druids take over the campus.
Phil already achieved his dream of renovating the track stadium. Oregon's dominance? What the fuck? 2014 and 2019. Jesus dude, you guys got clowned by Stanford just as much as UW did. -
We're comparing Oregon and Washington's football teams over the last 25 years. But for a handful of years in that time period you guys have been a fucking joke. But hey, I understand why you would want to count Stanford's win over Oregon as some of your own.haie said:
I did not say in terms of football.SFGbob said:
In terms of football? No fucking way are they equal. We left you guys behind in about 2000 and we've rarely looked back since. Yeah, I'm sure when the Billionaire Phil Knight dies he will do nothing to make sure Oregon's dominance doesn't continue.haie said:
I'm saying it like it's a complete failure on the coaching and AD, because it is.SFGbob said:
And yet despite your "superiority" the football product that you've put on the field for the last 25 years has only rarely been superior to the product Oregon has put on the field.haie said:Like I said if you look at the last 3 years of the Pac 12, it's ridiculous to claim any of those teams and coaches were great. They all shit the bed, had an easy conference championship game, and the difference was who they played in their bowl. It's certainly not a "marginal difference" saying that playing Ohio State who owns the entire conference isn't much different than that knuckle dragging Wisconsin team that put the ball on the ground for you. You play who you play so I don't have a problem with their rose bowl champ stuff, but it's a little early to crown his ass anything as anything more than 2016 Pete.
I'm not really talking about graduation rates. I'm talking about the fact that Oregon isn't telling kids "this is going to be so hard, you're going to get pushed to your limit, and we don't want anyone that isn't willing to do that". They're selling fun and correctly making college football on the west coast attractive to both recruits and fans. I've never seen UW do that in the last 6 years except how awesome their grades will be and how well they develop for the league. The rest of it isn't hard to shirk off if you're a sought after recruit. Sure athletes still have an easier time than most at UW. But they don't find that out until they get there.
Moreover what I see from the marketing department regarding how great Seattle is, Amazon and Microsoft, etc, isn't something I think kids care that much about. Their parents probably don't either.
But yes, UW is *fucking* superior to Oregon, and always will be. There are some people that would excel at all 4 schools, but who gives a shit.
But hey, at least you have the comfort in knowing that UW isn't selling fun to their recruits or fans. Got to find those little "victories" wherever you can I guess.
If you think that UW and Oregon are somehow equal and don't have different challenges to deal with, as in UW is in Seattle and wants to be just like Cal/Stanford/UCLA and a lot of people there don't give a fuck about sports at all, you're a moron. You should appreciate that until the inevitable Phil death and the druids take over the campus.
Phil already achieved his dream of renovating the track stadium. Oregon's dominance? What the fuck? 2014 and 2019. Jesus dude, you guys got clowned by Stanford just as much as UW did. -
I gave this argument up a decade ago.
-
You understand what I'm saying about as well as Vernon Adams understands a regression algorithm.SFGbob said:
We're comparing Oregon and Washington's football teams over the last 25 years. But for a handful of years in that time period you guys have been a fucking joke. But hey, I understand why you would want to count Stanford's win over Oregon as some of your own.haie said:
I did not say in terms of football.SFGbob said:
In terms of football? No fucking way are they equal. We left you guys behind in about 2000 and we've rarely looked back since. Yeah, I'm sure when the Billionaire Phil Knight dies he will do nothing to make sure Oregon's dominance doesn't continue.haie said:
I'm saying it like it's a complete failure on the coaching and AD, because it is.SFGbob said:
And yet despite your "superiority" the football product that you've put on the field for the last 25 years has only rarely been superior to the product Oregon has put on the field.haie said:Like I said if you look at the last 3 years of the Pac 12, it's ridiculous to claim any of those teams and coaches were great. They all shit the bed, had an easy conference championship game, and the difference was who they played in their bowl. It's certainly not a "marginal difference" saying that playing Ohio State who owns the entire conference isn't much different than that knuckle dragging Wisconsin team that put the ball on the ground for you. You play who you play so I don't have a problem with their rose bowl champ stuff, but it's a little early to crown his ass anything as anything more than 2016 Pete.
I'm not really talking about graduation rates. I'm talking about the fact that Oregon isn't telling kids "this is going to be so hard, you're going to get pushed to your limit, and we don't want anyone that isn't willing to do that". They're selling fun and correctly making college football on the west coast attractive to both recruits and fans. I've never seen UW do that in the last 6 years except how awesome their grades will be and how well they develop for the league. The rest of it isn't hard to shirk off if you're a sought after recruit. Sure athletes still have an easier time than most at UW. But they don't find that out until they get there.
Moreover what I see from the marketing department regarding how great Seattle is, Amazon and Microsoft, etc, isn't something I think kids care that much about. Their parents probably don't either.
But yes, UW is *fucking* superior to Oregon, and always will be. There are some people that would excel at all 4 schools, but who gives a shit.
But hey, at least you have the comfort in knowing that UW isn't selling fun to their recruits or fans. Got to find those little "victories" wherever you can I guess.
If you think that UW and Oregon are somehow equal and don't have different challenges to deal with, as in UW is in Seattle and wants to be just like Cal/Stanford/UCLA and a lot of people there don't give a fuck about sports at all, you're a moron. You should appreciate that until the inevitable Phil death and the druids take over the campus.
Phil already achieved his dream of renovating the track stadium. Oregon's dominance? What the fuck? 2014 and 2019. Jesus dude, you guys got clowned by Stanford just as much as UW did. -
I agree with most of this except I think it's Cal/UCLA that UW really aspires to be. Especially as a student there it seemed very incestuous between UW and Berkeley.creepycoug said:
My theory on all of that is that it's overplayed. I agree with some of what you wrote, but this idea that we're trying to be Stanford and that's hurting the football program ... I don't buy it. There's always tension between upper campus and big-tim athletics. Most schools want to be better academically and have forces pushing that goal. Florida State was a joke school; Florida was marginally better. They've both climbed the rankings and especially Florida, which has sky-rocketed. Those schools still sell the fb program ... winning, NFL and all that despite the powerful forces that push the academic aspects of the university. They're not mutually exclusive. Oregon, itself, is much more focused on its academic mission, and we can cite 100 examples of this.haie said:
I'm saying it like it's a complete failure on the coaching and AD, because it is.SFGbob said:
And yet despite your "superiority" the football product that you've put on the field for the last 25 years has only rarely been superior to the product Oregon has put on the field.haie said:Like I said if you look at the last 3 years of the Pac 12, it's ridiculous to claim any of those teams and coaches were great. They all shit the bed, had an easy conference championship game, and the difference was who they played in their bowl. It's certainly not a "marginal difference" saying that playing Ohio State who owns the entire conference isn't much different than that knuckle dragging Wisconsin team that put the ball on the ground for you. You play who you play so I don't have a problem with their rose bowl champ stuff, but it's a little early to crown his ass anything as anything more than 2016 Pete.
I'm not really talking about graduation rates. I'm talking about the fact that Oregon isn't telling kids "this is going to be so hard, you're going to get pushed to your limit, and we don't want anyone that isn't willing to do that". They're selling fun and correctly making college football on the west coast attractive to both recruits and fans. I've never seen UW do that in the last 6 years except how awesome their grades will be and how well they develop for the league. The rest of it isn't hard to shirk off if you're a sought after recruit. Sure athletes still have an easier time than most at UW. But they don't find that out until they get there.
Moreover what I see from the marketing department regarding how great Seattle is, Amazon and Microsoft, etc, isn't something I think kids care that much about. Their parents probably don't either.
But yes, UW is *fucking* superior to Oregon, and always will be. There are some people that would excel at all 4 schools, but who gives a shit.
But hey, at least you have the comfort in knowing that UW isn't selling fun to their recruits or fans. Got to find those little "victories" wherever you can I guess.
If you think that UW and Oregon are somehow equal and don't have different challenges to deal with, as in UW is in Seattle and wants to be just like Cal/Stanford/UCLA and a lot of people there don't give a fuck about sports at all, you're a moron. You should appreciate that until the inevitable Phil death and the druids take over the campus.
So why has UW struggled? One word: luck. You can have a serious AD and all the public support in the world; but until you get the right coach to string together some good seasons and the get recruiting ball rolling, you don't have shit. They got kind of lucky with Peterman, started winning, recruiting improved, etc. And then it didn't work out. That's the story of most programs.
Every single time you lost a coach you are at the roullete table for the next guy. Event the proven guys rarely succeed at the same level at their next stop.
Look, despite its disadvantages (stadium, etc.), Miami sits in a fantastic position with huge built-in advantages. Primary among those are proximity to the most fertile recruiting grounds anywhere, history of winning, legendary coaches, legendary players, location (Miami and South Beach > than 98% of alternatives) and a strong af brand. ALL of that, and they haven't done shit since, what 2003 or 2004? 16 years bro. That's a lot of mediocrity.
Oregon got lucky with Kelly, unlucky with Sling and Willie, and may have gotten lucky again. Time will tell. That's about as scientific as you're gonna get with it.
Stanford is another issue entirely and they have embarrassed Oregon and UW equally on the field. -
I recall beating Stanford twice when they had Luck as their QB. Something I don't believe UW ever did.
Getting beat 41 to 0 by a team that Oregon laid 52 points I agree is embarrassing. -
I recall your best team in school history getting beat by them at home when they didn't have Luck.SFGbob said:I recall beating Stanford twice when they had Luck as their QB. Something I don't believe UW ever did.
Getting beat 41 to 0 by a team that Oregon laid 52 points I agree is embarrassing. -
It happens. Your best team in the past 25 years was beat by Oregon. You should know a lot about losing to inferior competition. Hell a mediocre Oregon squad beat you in 2018.haie said:
I recall your best team in school history getting beat by them at home when they didn't have Luck.SFGbob said:I recall beating Stanford twice when they had Luck as their QB. Something I don't believe UW ever did.
Getting beat 41 to 0 by a team that Oregon laid 52 points I agree is embarrassing.
Oh yeah, in 2010, while you were getting your asses waxed by Stanford's best team 41 - 0, we beat Stanford's best team 52 - 31. -
I'm in the minority in thinking our best team in 25 years, minimally our most talented, lost to SC and Bama and wiped the trash straight out of Eugene that year.SFGbob said:
It happens. Your best team in the past 25 years was beat by Oregon. You should know a lot about losing to inferior competition. Hell a mediocre Oregon squad beat you in 2018.haie said:
I recall your best team in school history getting beat by them at home when they didn't have Luck.SFGbob said:I recall beating Stanford twice when they had Luck as their QB. Something I don't believe UW ever did.
Getting beat 41 to 0 by a team that Oregon laid 52 points I agree is embarrassing.
Oh yeah, in 2010, while you were getting your asses waxed by Stanford's best team 41 - 0, we beat Stanford's best team 52 - 31.
It's well documented we lost to inferior competition but talking shit after losing 4 out of 5 to bottom 2 cuog talent is rich. Needed your Make-A-Wish kicker to bail you out this year even.
You're a shit party school with your SEC West Coast bullshit even though you haven't matched even their 3rd best program. -
Counting the Coug wins as your own too now I see. We're talking Oregon Football and Washington Football and despite your claims of superiority you guy have been Oregon's bitch for nearly 25 years. There's no comparison between where the two programs are these days.haie said:
I'm in the minority in thinking our best team in 25 years, minimally our most talented, lost to SC and Bama and wiped the trash straight out of Eugene that year.SFGbob said:
It happens. Your best team in the past 25 years was beat by Oregon. You should know a lot about losing to inferior competition. Hell a mediocre Oregon squad beat you in 2018.haie said:
I recall your best team in school history getting beat by them at home when they didn't have Luck.SFGbob said:I recall beating Stanford twice when they had Luck as their QB. Something I don't believe UW ever did.
Getting beat 41 to 0 by a team that Oregon laid 52 points I agree is embarrassing.
Oh yeah, in 2010, while you were getting your asses waxed by Stanford's best team 41 - 0, we beat Stanford's best team 52 - 31.
It's well documented we lost to inferior competition but talking shit after losing 4 out of 5 to bottom 2 cuog talent is rich. Needed your Make-A-Wish kicker to bail you out this year even.
You're a shit party school with your SEC West Coast bullshit even though you haven't matched even their 3rd best program.
